Match List-I and List-II. List-IList-II P. Consent 1. Nichols v. Marsland Q. Inevitable accident 2.…
The matching is P-4, Q-3, R-1, S-2. Hall v. Brookland Auto Racing Club concerns consent to risks; Holmes v. Mather concerns inevitable accident. Nichols v. Marsland…
Choose your answer
Match List-I and List-II.
| List-I | List-II |
|---|---|
| P. Consent | 1. Nichols v. Marsland |
| Q. Inevitable accident | 2. Vaughan v. Taff Vale Rail Co. |
| R. Act of God | 3. Holmes v. Mather |
| S. Statutory authority | 4. Hall v. Brookland Auto Racing Club |
Answer and explanation
Correct answer B
The matching is P-4, Q-3, R-1, S-2. Hall v. Brookland Auto Racing Club concerns consent to risks; Holmes v. Mather concerns inevitable accident. Nichols v. Marsland illustrates act of God, while Vaughan v. Taff Vale Railway Co. concerns statutory authority.
Practice for these exams
-
All India Bar Examination (AIBE)
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
UGC NET Law
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
IIT Kharagpur LL.M. Entrance
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
JKSET Law
-
CLAT PG
Subject revision for a passage-based exam
-
CUET PG Law (LL.M.)
Subject revision
-
AILET PG
Subject revision
-
Bihar Judicial Services
Subject revision
-
Uttarakhand Judicial Services
Subject revision